Trump
- rgio - Apr 28, 2024 - 6:33pm
Joe Biden
- Beaker - Apr 28, 2024 - 6:08pm
Wordle - daily game
- Coaxial - Apr 28, 2024 - 6:03pm
Democratic Party
- westslope - Apr 28, 2024 - 5:41pm
The Dragons' Roost
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 5:37pm
NYTimes Connections
- ptooey - Apr 28, 2024 - 3:55pm
NY Times Strands
- ptooey - Apr 28, 2024 - 3:53pm
Questions.
- Red_Dragon - Apr 28, 2024 - 12:53pm
Upcoming concerts or shows you can't wait to see
- ScottFromWyoming - Apr 28, 2024 - 12:39pm
Israel
- R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 11:15am
Britain
- R_P - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:47am
Today in History
- Red_Dragon - Apr 28, 2024 - 10:32am
Birthday wishes
- GeneP59 - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:56am
If not RP, what are you listening to right now?
- Beaker - Apr 28, 2024 - 9:47am
SCOTUS
- Steely_D - Apr 28, 2024 - 1:44am
Talk Behind Their Backs Forum
- haresfur - Apr 27, 2024 - 11:57pm
Photography Forum - Your Own Photos
- Alchemist - Apr 27, 2024 - 11:23pm
Would you drive this car for dating with ur girl?
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 27, 2024 - 9:53pm
Classical Music
- miamizsun - Apr 27, 2024 - 1:23pm
LeftWingNutZ
- Lazy8 - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:46pm
Things You Thought Today
- Red_Dragon - Apr 27, 2024 - 12:17pm
Name My Band
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Apr 27, 2024 - 4:31am
The Moon
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:08pm
April 2024 Photo Theme - Happenstance
- fractalv - Apr 26, 2024 - 8:59pm
Musky Mythology
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 7:23pm
Mini Meetups - Post Here!
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 4:02pm
Australia has Disappeared
- Red_Dragon - Apr 26, 2024 - 2:41pm
Breaking News
- kcar - Apr 26, 2024 - 11:17am
Radio Paradise sounding better recently
- firefly6 - Apr 26, 2024 - 10:39am
Neil Young
- Steely_D - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:20am
Country Up The Bumpkin
- KurtfromLaQuinta - Apr 26, 2024 - 9:01am
Radio Paradise Comments
- miamizsun - Apr 26, 2024 - 5:09am
Environmental, Brilliance or Stupidity
- miamizsun - Apr 26, 2024 - 5:07am
The Obituary Page
- DaveInSaoMiguel - Apr 26, 2024 - 3:47am
Poetry Forum
- Manbird - Apr 25, 2024 - 12:30pm
Ask an Atheist
- R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 11:02am
Mixtape Culture Club
- miamizsun - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:36am
Afghanistan
- R_P - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:26am
Science in the News
- Red_Dragon - Apr 25, 2024 - 10:00am
What the hell OV?
- miamizsun - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:46am
The Abortion Wars
- Isabeau - Apr 25, 2024 - 9:27am
Vinyl Only Spin List
- ColdMiser - Apr 25, 2024 - 7:15am
What's that smell?
- Manbird - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:27pm
Song of the Day
- oldviolin - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:20pm
260,000 Posts in one thread?
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 24, 2024 - 10:55am
TV shows you watch
- Beaker - Apr 24, 2024 - 7:32am
Dialing 1-800-Manbird
- Bill_J - Apr 23, 2024 - 7:15pm
China
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 5:35pm
Economix
- islander - Apr 23, 2024 - 12:11pm
USA! USA! USA!
- R_P - Apr 23, 2024 - 11:05am
One Partying State - Wyoming News
- sunybuny - Apr 23, 2024 - 6:53am
YouTube: Music-Videos
- Red_Dragon - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:42pm
Ukraine
- haresfur - Apr 22, 2024 - 6:19pm
songs that ROCK!
- Steely_D - Apr 22, 2024 - 1:50pm
Bug Reports & Feature Requests
- q4Fry - Apr 22, 2024 - 11:57am
Republican Party
- R_P - Apr 22, 2024 - 9:36am
Malaysia
- dcruzj - Apr 22, 2024 - 7:30am
Canada
- westslope - Apr 22, 2024 - 6:23am
Russia
- NoEnzLefttoSplit - Apr 22, 2024 - 1:03am
Broccoli for cats - you gotta see this!
- Bill_J - Apr 21, 2024 - 6:16pm
Main Mix Playlist
- thisbody - Apr 21, 2024 - 12:04pm
George Orwell
- oldviolin - Apr 21, 2024 - 11:36am
• • • The Once-a-Day • • •
- oldviolin - Apr 20, 2024 - 7:44pm
What Did You See Today?
- Welly - Apr 20, 2024 - 4:50pm
Radio Paradise on multiple Echo speakers via an Alexa Rou...
- victory806 - Apr 20, 2024 - 2:11pm
Libertarian Party
- R_P - Apr 20, 2024 - 11:18am
Remembering the Good Old Days
- kurtster - Apr 20, 2024 - 2:37am
Words I didn't know...yrs ago
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 7:06pm
Things that make you go Hmmmm.....
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:59pm
Baseball, anyone?
- Red_Dragon - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:51pm
MILESTONES: Famous People, Dead Today, Born Today, Etc.
- Bill_J - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:44pm
2024 Elections!
- steeler - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:49pm
how do you feel right now?
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 6:02am
When I need a Laugh I ...
- miamizsun - Apr 19, 2024 - 5:43am
Live Music
- oldviolin - Apr 18, 2024 - 3:24pm
|
Index »
Music »
Radio »
Regarding Piracy
|
Page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next |
Umberdog
Location: In my body. Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 8:14pm |
|
Earth should demand payment; she should attach a price to every life to every pelt every song of bird every cry of Wolf every nibble of air, water, and sacrifice every bleat of sacrificial lamb She should attach a price to the sun and the moon! For all that we are we have taken from her. we pay each other for her gifts. But this is Nature's way give to them all that you are and thus make yourself important so they reward you with enough of yourself to live. So why do anything? How many devils are given birth while we wait on the better angels of our nature to show themselves.
|
|
winter
Location: in exile, as always Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 7:45pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote:Yes, and in turn, theoretically, the composers. But there are (currently) no performance royalties from terrestrial radio play, so if you're in a band and record a cover song and it's a smash hit on the radio but no one buys it, you're still broke. But the record industry has traditionally viewed airplay as promotion... that is, get the people to fall in love with a song and they'll buy it. But for everyone who bought "You Light Up My Life," millions more heard it, maybe even tuned into a particular station to hear it, maybe hung out with friends who played it... and still never bought the record. Is that lost revenue? I'm not wanting to get into the justify bootlegging devil's advocate thing here but there are some points to be made. In the case of books, though, well would you ban public libraries? Nah. Your biggest problem with a bootlegged copy of your book is that it's your only revenue stream, whereas a band can at least go sing for their supper. Sure a lot of music is strictly studio craftsmanship or something that is impossible to re-create onstage, but the vast majority of what we listen to, we can go see live. But if you're not a Disney brand pop star, you're going to need the bootlegged music to make the rounds or no one's going to know to come see you. I'm not suggesting banning libraries. They buy copies of the books, and they loan them out - they don't let people make photocopies for their friends. (Not on the premises, anyway.) Sure, I'd rather people bought the book than checked it out of the library, but there it is. The citizens own the library, the library owns the book, and I got paid for that one copy just like all the others out there.
|
|
winter
Location: in exile, as always Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 7:35pm |
|
Perhaps I'm missing something, but to me all the arguments for piracy seem to boil down to "we don't want to pay what they're asking, plus they have old business models and bad practices so to hell with them". I get the latter, but the former makes no sense to me.
If I create something, I get to choose what to charge for it. You can think I'm overcharging, you can disagree with how I choose to sell it, and you can express your displeasure by choosing not to give me any money - but you don't get to decide that since my lemonade is too pricey you're just going to take it. That's just not right. That's not capitalism in some advanced new Web-savvy sense. That's just you ripping me off.
The fact that with digital media I still have the same product to sell as before is beside the point. When you buy a book, you're mostly buying the words - the ink, paper, and cloth are just carriers for the real product. (Kind of like the relationship between milk and a carton.) When I'm selling music that's available in a digital format, it's not the ones and zeros that you're buying. I could send you a stream of random bytes the same size as an album and you would justly consider yourself ripped off if you'd been expecting music. The fact that it's easy to copy, occupies no physical space, and can be copied and played virtually indefinitely with no loss of quality is irrelevant. You're paying for the artists' work, not the format it comes in - the message, not the medium.
I really don't get it. Yes, record companies need to adapt to the digital age. Yes, they have some awful business practices and aren't doing themselves any publicity favors. You still only get two real choices: pay what they're asking or accept that you don't get your own copy.
|
|
laprincessa
Location: A happy girl Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 11:19am |
|
Beaker wrote: The point I was making, is adapt or die. The consumer electronics industry, like the record company monoliths, must adapt to the demands of the consumer — or watch from the sidelines as others eat its lunch. The smartphone is but the latest example of innovation leading to obsolescence of previous technologies. The fact that the same manufacturers (Samsung, Apple et al) have products in both old and new technologies is further evidence of the view - adapt or die.
My premise is simply that the entire problem with the record companies is technology has far outpaced their ability to adapt. Artists, established or up and coming, are in control of their marketing now - with Facebook, MySpace and easy to build and low cost websites, to name but one change impacting the industry. Record companies have lost much of their control over artists now - and that's just not ever going to change back. The loss of control over the finished product - reflected by piracy - means the record company has failed to adapt to the needs of the consumer. EXACTLY!
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 10:59am |
|
Beaker wrote: The point I was making, is adapt or die. The consumer electronics industry, like the record company monoliths, must adapt to the demands of the consumer — or watch from the sidelines as others eat its lunch. The smartphone is but the latest example of innovation leading to obsolescence of previous technologies. The fact that the same manufacturers (Samsung, Apple et al) have products in both old and new technologies is further evidence of the view - adapt or die.
My premise is simply that the entire problem with the record companies is technology has far outpaced their ability to adapt. Artists, established or up and coming, are in control of their marketing now - with Facebook, MySpace and easy to build and low cost websites, to name but one change impacting the industry. Record companies have lost much of their control over artists now - and that's just not ever going to change back. The loss of control over the finished product - reflected by piracy - means the record company has failed to adapt to the needs of the consumer.
Yep, yep that is exactly what I was saying. What is that cheesy corporate BS? "obstacles are only vaguely disguised opportunities". Ooooooh, I am going to have to take a shower now for saying that corporate crap tag line!
|
|
laprincessa
Location: A happy girl Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 10:35am |
|
Beaker wrote:To address the music industry conundrum: And as we watch the major record companies business model crumble (oh wait, that's already happened) and those execs keep on looking for someone to sue over their failure to adapt to the new market realities, the consumer keeps on doin' his/her thang. Albums sales via traditional distribution means are but a fraction of a 'new' band's strategy. Nowadays it's all about selling the CDs at the concerts ($15-20 here) and by way of individual tune downloads. The majority of consumers don't want to pay $25-$30 for a album in the retail store any longer. Blame the iPod and mp3 players - load just the tunes you want (on what was at the beginning limited space). That's where the market moved. And digital files are easy to copy ... drat! And mp3 players and iPods are now on the way out: TEN BUSINESSES SMARTPHONES ARE DESTROYING.The old business model for record companies makes them dinosaurs. The question is how are they adapting to stay relevant? Great post, but I got news for you - most of the items listed (those were items listed, not businesses) are owned by companies who have their hands in the smartphone till. Think about it: Palm (pdas), Apple (ipod), Samsung & about a million others (mp3/cd/dvd players), etc. And let's face it some of the items on that list weren't long for this world anyway... flip video cameras? I mean seriously — those were/are are just another channel of products made by the camera and electronics industry to fill a hole in the industry that wasn't being filled at the time. They sell those sorts of things until the industry dies off then create another item OR better sell their technology to the industries that want them... i.e. the smartphone industry. GPS is a prime example - I guarantee you none of those phone manufacturers created their OWN gps technology. They're buying it for resale from the pioneers in the industry. Same for hand held video games — those weren't planned to be around forever, they knew another niche would fill the hole eventually - so the technology is purchased and placed. Watches however, I have to agree - I would imagine they actually ARE on the down swing. I personally haven't really owned one in years....mainly because I have a current in my body that zaps out the battery (I have about 10 in my jewelry box that I can't wear), so my cell phone has been a saving grace for me over the years. But, that's been going on for at least 15+ years. Nothing new on this front. I'm just saying that your original comment about the changes in the record industry are true - bands are finding new ways to promote themselves and make more percentage of the dollar than before, but ultimately the folks who still hold the popularity purse strings, at THIS point in time, are still the record execs. as for that goofy article about businesses being destroyed because of the smartphone? Pscchaa, whatever.
|
|
laprincessa
Location: A happy girl Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 9:50am |
|
I posted the original entry mainly to pinpoint the excessive overhead in an antiquated business model. Execs expensing cocaine? Being bonused $1m in a year — these kinds of things definitely effect artists. It's the trickle down syndrome. How in the world can most artists (especially those excited to sign their first record deal) get a fair shake? They can't. Because often times that first contract is attached to a 2-10 record deal. So, who's making the best of it, EVEN in these days of piracy? The execs. It's a top-heavy industry that truly needs a crash to Phoenix from it's own ashes. Involving new theft deterrents or even creating an entirely new digital format that cannot be copied unless paid for (a key sorta like the software industry) is definitely the direction they need to head, I think. How do you think Adobe holds so tight to their rights? But honestly, the record companies can't do anything while standing in the middle of the fire and shouting that they're ON fire. They started the problem and ultimately they're the ones who will have to repair it.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 5:50am |
|
private_di wrote:
Just my $0.02.
Which is about what they would get if they'd put it on iTunes for you!
|
|
(former member)
Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 5:43am |
|
sirdroseph wrote:Bottom line though is that artists that wish to make a living through their art, had better alter their distribution and maketing methods to survive and even thrive in this digital age. When I first heard "Zumurud" by Mich Gerber here on RP, I said "Wow, I've got to purchase this song!" I spent a good half a day trying to find someplace to purchase the MP3 with no luck, I even decided that I would purchase the whole darned CD ("The Endless String") just to get that one song if I could only find it...I finally found some international music site that was selling the MP3, so I filled out all the info, gave my credit card, and clicked "checkout"...was greeted by a message stating that I am forbidden from purchasing the song because I am in the U.S. !?!?!?! Maybe today that's changed and you can download it from someplace like Amazon, but I don't want it anymore, it was an impulse purchase I was willing to make and that music company blew the chance to make money on my impulse. Just my $0.02.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 5:35am |
|
kurtster wrote: Hmmm. In the beginning, half of their stuff were covers of other peoples songs. The penny per play deal was long before they started doing only their own material.
Grey area, needs further investigation.
- The deal Epstein signed on behalf of the Beatles was pathetic and George Martin was later to describe it as 'pretty awful'. There were no advance payments and they would receive only one penny per single-and half that on overseas sales. A 12-track album would only be counted as six cuts. There were three one-year options with an increase of a quarter of a penny at the end of the first year and an increase of a halfpenny at the end of the second year (link)
Bands weren't generally in a position to negotiate airplay royalties. Perhaps at the peak of their career the Beatles *might* have been able to dictate terms, but I'm sure they did not. Certainly at the beginning, money for airplay was expected to flow the other direction. (See: Payola) Early Beatles recordings were a lot of covers; these got little airplay in the US, if any at all.
|
|
sirdroseph
Location: Not here, I tell you wat Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 4:42am |
|
Slippery slope and I see both points. I can simplify it though, the digital age and P2P capability has in effect put the products completely out of commercial control. It is tantamount to retailers laying their inventory on the sidewalk or your street with no price tags, whether you think it is immoral to take something does not change the fact that everything will be taken. I respect those that hold completely to their virtue and do not download anything through principle, good on ya for that! Bottom line though is that artists that wish to make a living through their art, had better alter their distribution and maketing methods to survive and even thrive in this digital age. Their are many artists that hire geek squads to infiltrate P2P networks with bad and even virus affected files. Also has someone has mentioned before, some view the digital age as an opportunity to reach the masses like never before for previously unknown artists, creating a buzz that will increase ticket revenue for live shows and possibly even get them signed to a label. Bottom line, ship has sailed on whether they can or should stop illegal downloading, the artists time would be better spent using it to their advantage.
|
|
beamends
|
Posted:
Nov 15, 2010 - 2:06am |
|
Most people think piracy is ok. Until it's their work that's being pirated.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 9:14pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote: As performers? I don't think so. But they got paid for airplay as composers.
Hmmm. In the beginning, half of their stuff were covers of other peoples songs. The penny per play deal was long before they started doing only their own material. Grey area, needs further investigation.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 9:07pm |
|
kurtster wrote: I remember that the Beatles negotiated a penny per airplay here in the States. Perhaps some old dj's around here could weigh in on that.
As performers? I don't think so. But they got paid for airplay as composers.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 9:00pm |
|
ScottFromWyoming wrote:Yes, and in turn, theoretically, the composers. But there are (currently) no performance royalties from terrestrial radio play, so if you're in a band and record a cover song and it's a smash hit on the radio but no one buys it, you're still broke. But the record industry has traditionally viewed airplay as promotion... that is, get the people to fall in love with a song and they'll buy it. But for everyone who bought "You Light Up My Life," millions more heard it, maybe even tuned into a particular station to hear it, maybe hung out with friends who played it... and still never bought the record. Is that lost revenue? I'm not wanting to get into the justify bootlegging devil's advocate thing here but there are some points to be made. In the case of books, though, well would you ban public libraries? Nah. Your biggest problem with a bootlegged copy of your book is that it's your only revenue stream, whereas a band can at least go sing for their supper. Sure a lot of music is strictly studio craftsmanship or something that is impossible to re-create onstage, but the vast majority of what we listen to, we can go see live. But if you're not a Disney brand pop star, you're going to need the bootlegged music to make the rounds or no one's going to know to come see you. I remember that the Beatles negotiated a penny per airplay here in the States. Perhaps some old dj's around here could weigh in on that.
|
|
islander
Location: West coast somewhere Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 8:58pm |
|
winter wrote: If the music isn't released in a particular region, I think you should find a way to buy it from the region it's released in. Granted, they've chosen to forego the revenue from your region (at least for now). I still think that's their choice and we don't get to circumvent it.
It's a little less clear when it comes to stuff no longer in print. I guess I would still say that if the owners of the material aren't making it available any more, what right do the consumers have to sneak it out? I don't know.
And you're right, the industry's doing itself no favors with publicity like that. I read recently about a woman who's been ordered to pay millions in damages for file-sharing. If you want to go after Napster or whoever for millions, fair enough. But it's hard to believe one person downloaded anything like enough to do millions in damages.
There are some pretty grey areas. That is why I object so much to using theft to describe copyright infringement, and the claim that all peer to peer is bad. Sometimes there are perks to seeking out the rarities rather than just downloading: Some cool liner notes in these, and Sideshow was an Australian CD, that I got as a Japanese import - the plastic sleeve has all kinds of Kanji and other interesting bits on it. Sometimes those things wind up being really valuable too. I've had a couple that I wound up selling on ebay because the values got so high.
|
|
ScottFromWyoming
Location: Powell Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 8:54pm |
|
winter wrote: If memory serves, the music publishers get paid every time one of their songs are played.
Yes, and in turn, theoretically, the composers. But there are (currently) no performance royalties from terrestrial radio play, so if you're in a band and record a cover song and it's a smash hit on the radio but no one buys it, you're still broke. But the record industry has traditionally viewed airplay as promotion... that is, get the people to fall in love with a song and they'll buy it. But for everyone who bought "You Light Up My Life," millions more heard it, maybe even tuned into a particular station to hear it, maybe hung out with friends who played it... and still never bought the record. Is that lost revenue? I'm not wanting to get into the justify bootlegging devil's advocate thing here but there are some points to be made. In the case of books, though, well would you ban public libraries? Nah. Your biggest problem with a bootlegged copy of your book is that it's your only revenue stream, whereas a band can at least go sing for their supper. Sure a lot of music is strictly studio craftsmanship or something that is impossible to re-create onstage, but the vast majority of what we listen to, we can go see live. But if you're not a Disney brand pop star, you're going to need the bootlegged music to make the rounds or no one's going to know to come see you.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 8:49pm |
|
Umberdog wrote: It was the best of times... it was the worst of times,,, and so on.
splains everything, eh ? and thanks for reading my earlier post.
|
|
Umberdog
Location: In my body. Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 8:48pm |
|
kurtster wrote:Dickens was paid by the word ... It was the best of times... it was the worst of times... and so on.
|
|
kurtster
Location: where fear is not a virtue Gender:
|
Posted:
Nov 14, 2010 - 8:46pm |
|
islander wrote: Save your words for people who will hear them... and for those who are counting them.
Dickens was paid by the word ...
|
|
|